Every drug program has a breaking point
Conviction isn't evidence.We find what is.
Independent, AI-native scientific scrutiny for those who bet on drugs.
Request access →Independent, AI-native scientific scrutiny for those who bet on drugs.
Request access →You check Carfax before you buy a car.
When you bet on a drug, you check Prelucis.
It hides across decades of literature, thousands of trials, every comparable program and its fate, and the regulatory record — more than any team can connect by hand. Not a failure of skill. A failure of scale.
Once you're in, you've fallen in love — and the loudest conviction in the room becomes the house view. No one wants to be the one who says it breaks.
We read it all — at machine scale — then apply pressure until the fault lines show. We hand you what's underneath, before the catalyst does.
We don't ask whether it works.
We ask how it breaks.
Most analysis builds the case for a program. We invert it — assume the break, then hunt for where. We read it all at machine scale and apply adversarial pressure until the fault lines show. The break is the edge; everything else is already priced.
The break is at the endpoint. Sensitivity collapses in the responder subgroup once placebo drift is normalised. Three comparable programs failed on the same axis — and the consensus model has not priced it.
Prelucis is in private release with a small number of funds.